Banned books are not a new topic. In fact, book banning spans human history – as long as books have existed, humans have had polarizing opinions on them.
During the 200s BCE, Chinese emperor Shih Huang Ti is said to have executed hundreds of scholars and burned books to control the political narrative. In the Roman Empire, Ovid was banned in the year 8 CE for his erotic poetry. The first book to be banned in the United States was New English Canaan in 1637 because it lampooned the puritans.
The recent debate seems to revolve around these points:
- “Books aren’t actually banned, just taken out of a curriculum in one place”
- “Books aren’t being banned from schools, the content is just being moderated appropriately”
- “Monitoring what our children read is important”
In this article, I’m going to respond to each of these arguments to the best of my ability. I’ve linked all sources throughout.
Point 1: “Books aren’t actually banned, just taken out of a curriculum in one place”
This is true. But I don’t think we should take it as lightly as all that.
When any school or library in the United States bans or challenges a book, the American Library Association catalogues it on their official list of banned books. They’re still available to buy or own.
Many of the most critically acclaimed and important pieces of literature have been banned or challenged in some schools. This list includes books like To Kill a Mockingbird, Diary of Anne Frank, and even the Bible, to name a few. Banning books like this can prevent educators from using them to spark conversation in the classroom about real-world issues.
While some try to ban books for contested viewpoints or language, there are also those who try to ban books for more arbitrary and subjective reasons. For example, Harry Potter is oft-contested for supposedly promoting witchcraft or the occult.
Since parents are often the ones spear-heading these efforts, it begs the question: should one parent’s educational preferences be used as a standard for everyone else’s children? In my opinion, no. Which leads me to the next point.
Point 2: “Books aren’t being banned from schools, the content is just being moderated appropriately”
I agree that it’s important we have someone to oversee what books are available in a school. The good news is: we already do. They’re called librarians.
School librarians are trained on what constitutes age appropriate reading for their school. Becoming a librarian usually requires a college degree and lots of training. Not only do they have to know what’s what for their students’ reading level and age range, the books themselves must meet rigorous guidelines before the librarian will make purchases.
When someone says, “For example, a school wouldn’t have 50 Shades of Grey,” as part of their argument on this point, I’m always baffled. Of course they wouldn’t – it wouldn’t even be on any list of books they could feasibly have in their school. It’s comparing apples to oranges.
Most of the challenged books are not sexual in nature. In fact, many deal with serious, real-world issues or ideas. While they may at times handle heavier themes (like war, abuse, or prejudice, to name a few), the books often present this information in an age-appropriate way.
It’s important to point out that these conversations also see mention of racism and homophobia as motivators for book banning. When book banners list “violence” as a banning reason for a novel like The Hate U Give, yet a book like The Hunger Games (wherein children are pitted against each other to literally fight to the death) doesn’t even make the same list, it’s worth asking whether the racial identity of the authors or protagonists plays a role.
Note: that isn’t an arbitrary comparison on my part. We read The Hunger Games in my ninth grade English class in 2010-2011.
Point 3: “Monitoring what our children read is important”
A word before I answer: as someone who is not a parent, my opinion on this point is limited and I acknowledge that. I am passionate about books though, and my parents didn’t monitor my own reading growing up, so these facts do color my views. And since parenting is obviously subjective, this section is largely based on personal opinion.
Every kid is different, sure, but I personally believe kids in general deserve more credit for what they can handle from books. Why?
Because a kid probably won’t read something they’re not interested in.
Just like adults. Have you ever tried to make a person interested in reading? It’s like pulling teeth. Even I, a dogged reader, will give up books that don’t catch my interest. In school, I “read” many books for class that I basically tuned out for lack of interest, and remember very little of today, ten years on.
And in today’s age, with the advent of SparkNotes, movie editions, and now AI, a student really doesn’t have to read a book to pass a class. Whether or not it’s ethical to use these resources is another debate entirely.
On another note – these books can be great jumping-off points for conversation. Why not encourage a child to share their opinions in classroom discussion, especially if their opinions are contrary to a book’s message? Why not select a few alternative books for them to read at home if we’d rather they had a different perspective?
A better question: why take a book out of children’s hands when we can use them to digest difficult topics? The only answer I can think of is control. When you can control education, you can control what the next generation thinks.
In conclusion, be skeptical.
As soon as I hear of another book hitting banned books lists, I buy it. Because I want to know what it is they don’t want their kids to know.
Read banned books. Form your own opinions. Don’t let someone else’s summary be your entire perspective of a book. And if the person leading the banning has any kind of power (political, religious, or otherwise), all the more reason to question their motives.
Check out some of my other recent blogs:
